2.02 rfp-ARG-2664-05232024.docx

Jet Propulsion Laboratory California Institute of Technology 4800 Oak Grove Drive Pasadena CA 91109-8099

Date: June 12, 2024 Attn: Prospective Bidders – Small Business Set Aside

Subject: JPL Request for Proposal (RFP) No. ARG-2664-05232024 for MECHANICAL SYSTEMS STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS SUPPORT SERVICES

Reference: Attachments

The Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) invites your organization to submit a written Cost Type proposal in conformance with the instructions contained in this letter and its enclosures, which comprise the RFP for JPL’s acquisition of the subject effort. This is a Small Business Set Aside per Attachment A-6.

This RFP does not commit JPL or the Government of the United States to pay any costs incurred in submitting your proposal. Proposers participate in this RFP process solely at their own risk and expense. JPL reserves the right to cancel this RFP and to reject any or all proposals.

For small businesses participating in this RFP, the APEX Accelerators can provide guidance to small businesses in Government Contracting and other free services such as counseling, training, workshops, etc.

APEX website: www.apexaccelerators.us An additional resource for small businesses is the Small Business Development Center (SBDC). The SBDC program is the SBA’s largest small business development program and offer free services as well.

SBDC Website: https://pcrsbdc.org/

Please refer to RFP Attachment A-6 “Notice of Small Business Set-Aside.” The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code and description for this acquisition is 541330 Engineering Services, Exception 1: Military and Aerospace Equipment and Military Weapons. The size standard for this NAICS code is $47.0M. Additional information can be found here: https://www.sba.gov/document/support-table-size-standards.

JPL has not yet received funding to support this acquisition and anticipates, but cannot guarantee, that funding will be forthcoming. This RFP is being issued at this time in order to maintain project schedule and to allow for timely award of a subcontract if the anticipated funding arrives in a timely fashion.

Provide your CAGE Code and the name of your cognizant Government Audit Agency (i.e. DCAA, etc.), if any, their phone number and point of contact, and a copy of the letter that indicates their approval of your organization’s direct and indirect rates. Submit your proposal by email to the undersigned.

PROPOSERS ARE ADVISED THAT JPL HAS IDENTIFIED MANDATORY QUALIFICATION CRITERIA IN THE RFP GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS. THE MANDATORY QUALIFICATION CRITERIA ARE TO PROVIDE THE PROSPECTIVE PROPOSER WITH A BASIS FOR DETERMINING WHETHER OR NOT THEY MIGHT MEET THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOR CONSIDERATION OF AWARD.

In compliance with RFP Attachment A-20 Evidence of Adequacy of Accounting System”, if selected for negotiations, at the time of selection the proposer shall provide one or more of the following documents:

1. A Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) accounting system certification.

2. A third-party accounting system certification (e.g., another government agency or prime contractor).

3. A letter from the proposer’s accounting firm stating that the firm approves of the adequacy of the proposer’s accounting system for accumulating costs under a cost reimbursement subcontract.

Please note that your proposal is due at JPL no later than July 12, 2024, 3:00 p.m. (Pacific Time). Attachment A-14 “Past Performance” is due June 26, 2024 by 3:00 p.m (Pacific Time). At the time you respond to Attachment A-14, please state in an email if your company has a facility clearance, for information purposes only. This information will not be considered in the evaluation and selection process.

All questions made to JPL after the official RFP release date must be received via email. The questions and answers will be posted on the RFP website: https://acquisition.jpl.nasa.gov/opportunities/. The questioner will remain anonymous. This website will contain the RFP and a continually updated set of all questions and answers pertaining to the RFP, in the form of an addendum.

Failure to provide any of the data requested in this RFP may render the proposal nonresponsive.

By no later than June 26, 2024, as a convenience to JPL, provide to the undersigned, an email statement that you do or do not intend to submit a proposal.

Should you have any questions, please address them to the undersigned by email.

Sincerely, Angela R Glenore Subcontracts Manager Phone No.: (818) 354-8244 E-mail: Angela.R.Azevedo@jpl.nasa.gov

Attachments: RFP consisting of:

• Cover Sheet and Table of Contents

• General Instructions

• Technical/Management Instructions

• Cost/Price Instructions

• RFP Attachments

Standard Subcontract consisting of:

• Standard Subcontract

• Referenced Exhibits

• Referenced GPs & AGPs

• Subcontract Form Set

GENERAL INFORMATION

Note to all Proposers:

Under the JPL/NASA Prime Contract the California Institute of Technology (Caltech) operates the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL). JPL is a Federally Funded Research and Development Center (FFRDC) funded by NASA that conducts research and development in space science and other science areas specified or approved by NASA. See FAR 35.017 for description of FFRDC. JPL is also the name of an unincorporated subdivision of Caltech a private non-profit educational institution chartered under the laws of the State of California. JPL is not an agent of the Government.

In connection with research performed under JPL/NASA Prime Contract, JPL is frequently called upon to obtain and evaluate cost or pricing data submitted by subcontractors as required by FAR 15.402, 15.403-4(b) and 15.404-2(a). JPL is authorized to obtain proposal evaluations and rates and factors from either DCMA or the appropriate contract administrative/audit activities as necessary to evaluate a prospective subcontractor’s proposal.

REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL

REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL NO.:ARG-2664-05232024

FOR:

MECHANICAL SYSTEMS STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS SUPPORT SERVICES

PROPOSALS ARE TO BE RECEIVED AT JPL NO LATER THAN:

Date: July 12, 2024

3:00 p.m. Pacific Time

COMMUNICATIONS IN REFERENCE TO THIS RFP

Any communication in reference to this RFP must be via email and directed to:

California Institute of Technology Jet Propulsion Laboratory 4800 Oak Grove Drive Pasadena, CA 91109-8099

Date of Issuance: June 10, 2024

TABLE OF CONTENTS

RFP No.: ARG-2664-05232024

REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL

GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS………………………………………………………………………. 6

TECHNICAL/MANAGEMENT PROPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS………………………………… 10

VOLUME III: COST/PRICE INSTRUCTIONS…………………………………………………………. 17

OTHER FACTORS……………………………………………………………………………………. 24

1.0 PAST PERFORMANCE

ATTACHMENTS TO THE SOLICITATION. See form JPL 2839 for a list of Attachments

• Group A Attachments must be completed and attached to your proposal.

• Group B Attachments consist of forms and documents for informational purposes only. Note

• Both A and B Attachments can be found through the electronic address identified below as:

https://acquisition.jpl.nasa.gov/terms-conditions/

GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

1.0 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS/INFORMATION

The effort to be performed will be in accordance with the Standard Subcontract. JPL reserves the right to retain all proposal information submitted in response to this RFP.

1.1 Proprietary Information

If the proposal contains Proprietary Information that is not to be disclosed, you must place the following wording on the cover sheet of each electronic file:

“Proprietary Information contained in pages _____________ of this proposal furnished in connection with RFP No. ARG-2664-05232024 shall not be used or disclosed, except for evaluation purposes, provided that if a subcontract is awarded to this offeror as a result of or in connection with the submission of this proposal, JPL and the Government shall have the right to use or disclose this Proprietary Information to the extent provided in the subcontract. This restriction does not limit JPL’s right to use or disclose any Proprietary Information obtained from another source without restriction.”

1.2 Requests for Clarification/RFP Addenda

During the proposal preparation period, all requests for clarification and/or additional information must be submitted by e-mail to the Subcontracts Manager referenced on the RFP cover page. When appropriate, responses to requests, as well as any JPL initiated changes, will be provided to known prospective proposer(s) as addenda to the RFP.

1.3 Compliance with Export Control Laws and Regulations

In the performance of this RFP, JPL may exchange information or other technology which may be subject to the export control laws and regulations of the United States, including the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR), 22 C.F.R. 120-130 and the Export Administration Act Regulations (EAR), 15 C.F.R. 730-774. All proposing parties agree to fully comply with all such laws and regulations while participating in this RFP process.

1.4 Proposals via Email Only

Proposals are to be submitted only as an attachment(s) to an e-mail, and must:

• Have a scanned signature or an e-signature.

• Provide files in the following format: Microsoft Office family, Adobe (text-searchable), or a compatible format. For cost/price data, the format should be Excel or compatible.

• Not be an “.exe” or encrypted file or have multiple file extensions (e.g., doc.pdf). JPL IT Security system may reject multiple file extensions for suspected malicious content.

• Be sent to the Subcontracts Manager referenced by “Attention:” on the RFP cover page.

• BE 20MB OR LESS in total size for the entire e-mail (including all attachments, signatures, text contained in the body of the e-mail, company logos, etc.). If your email exceeds 20MB, the proposal must be sent in more than one email or using a mutually agreeable large file transfer system.

• NOTE: If you received this RFP via JPL’s large file transfer system, you may create an account by following the link in the original RFP email and use it to submit your proposal. (Please note JPL’s large file transfer tool has a limit of 80GB per transfer).

• Notify the Subcontracts Manager referenced on the JPL RFP Cover Page if multiple e-mails are needed for a given volume of your proposal (e.g., technical/Management, Cost, or Past Performance).

• If the submission of more than one email or large file transfer is required, then ALL emails and large file transfers must be received on the JPL server by the time and date stated on the RFP cover sheet. Allow sufficient time for electronic submission.

2.0 LATE E-MAIL PROPOSALS:

Any proposal, portion of a proposal, or proposal revision received at JPL after the date and time specified on the cover page of this RFP may not be considered for evaluation and award, except under any of the following circumstances:

2.1 JPL determines that the proposal was late due solely to mishandling by JPL or infrastructure disruption at JPL after receipt at JPL, provided that the timely receipt at JPL is evidenced by JPL email server time stamp.

2.2 No acceptable proposals are received as of the proposal due date and time.

2.3 If an emergency or unanticipated event interrupts normal JPL operation thereby affecting timely receipt of proposals nor can an amendment to extend be issued, the time specified for receipt of proposal will be extended to the same time on the first work day of normal operations.

2.4 JPL may, at its sole discretion to enhance competition, extend the due date for proposals after the due date currently set forth in the RFP or in any extension thereto has passed.

3.0 RESERVED

4.0 RESERVED

5.0 RESERVED

6.0 SOURCE EVALUATION AND SELECTION PROCESS

NOTE: JPL, at its discretion, may waive minor informalities and minor irregularities in proposals received, and will not complete the initial evaluation of any proposal when it is determined that the proposal is unacceptable per NASA Far Supplement 1815.305-70.

Source selection is based on the following:

6.1 Proposal Evaluation

Proposals will be evaluated and scored according to the criteria described in the Technical/Management Proposal Instructions of the RFP.

• Although cost/price will not be scored, the proposed cost/price shall be a substantial factor in source selection and is of lesser importance than the combined technical and management areas.

• The closer the proposers are in the qualitative (evaluated) technical and/or management areas, the more important cost/price can become.

• JPL may select a source whose qualitative merits are lower but whose lower cost/price is commensurate with providing the best overall “value.” Conversely, a source may be selected whose cost/price is higher, but its higher qualitative merits are commensurate with providing best overall “value.”

The proposal evaluation process is as follows:

6.1.1 Initial Evaluation: Proposals are evaluated against the pre-set areas of evaluation outlined in the Technical/Management Proposal instructions of the RFP. An analysis of the cost/price details (if applicable) is performed and proposed costs/prices are compared.

6.1.2 Cost/Price Proposal Adjustments: Cost/price proposals are reviewed for mathematical accuracy, rate application, omissions, and reasonableness. If the Buy American Act or rent-free use of Government-furnished property applies, the cost/price will be adjusted as required for the purpose of evaluation.

6.1.4 Competitive Range Discussions: JPL may make source selection after the initial proposal evaluation or may conduct discussions with the proposers determined to be within the competitive range. The purpose of the discussions is to assist the evaluators in fully understanding each proposal by verifying strengths and weaknesses, discussing any omissions and ambiguities, verifying the validity of the proposed cost/price, assessing the proposed personnel and examining the proposer’s capabilities for performing the work. JPL may also request cost/price proposal clarifications in order to correct errors, omissions, or ambiguities in the proposal. NOTE: Only those cost/price clarifications specifically requested by JPL will be accepted.

6.1.5 Cost Realism: JPL’s final evaluation may include completing a thorough assessment of the cost/price realism of each proposal. In performing this assessment, JPL may develop a “probable cost” for each proposer. “Probable cost” is defined as JPL’s best estimate of the cost/price of any subcontract that is most likely to result from the offeror’s proposal.

6.1.6 Final Evaluation: Upon completion of the initial evaluation findings, any discussions, and any cost/price clarifications, a final evaluation is conducted resulting in subcontractor selection for negotiations or award.

6.2 Multiple Award

JPL may, at its discretion, select more than one proposer for award. The selection will be made in accordance with the evaluation process described below, and in consideration of the technical/management merits, price, and past performance information.

7.0 RESTRICTIVE MARKINGS

7.1 JPL’s Prime Contract with NASA contains important requirements regarding the protection and preservation of the Government’s technical data rights. The attached Standard Subcontract may require the delivery of technical and/or confidential-proprietary data. Limited rights data can be used by the Government and JPL in furtherance of Government contract obligations.

7.2 In your proposal, include a list of any technical and/or confidential-proprietary data that you expect to deliver to JPL in performance of the Standard Subcontract that will be marked with restrictive markings per the General Provisions entitled “Rights in Data – General” and “Limitation on Restrictive Markings.”

8.0 EXCEPTIONS/DECLINATIONS/ASSUMPTIONS

Any exceptions to either the RFP and/or Standard Subcontract (including its exhibits), or equivalent assumptions, or a declination to provide the rate information requested in the Cost/Price Instructions, may make your proposal unacceptable for evaluation. For each and every exception, declination or assumption you must provide a detailed explanation and associated full rationale. Additionally, for each exception taken, provide the alternative language proposed. Place all this information in a special section of your proposal entitled “Exceptions/Declinations/Assumptions.”

TECHNICAL/MANAGEMENT PROPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS

Present and organize your proposal in accordance with the following:

1.0 MANDATORY QUALIFICATIONS

Proposers must meet the following mandatory qualifications in order to be considered a qualified source and thereby eligible for award. Include evidence of your ability to meet these qualification capabilities as a separate letter or attachment to your proposal identifying it as documented evidence to meet Mandatory Qualifications.

1.1 At the time of proposal response, the offeror shall have the ability to perform structural analysis using classical and finite element methods of Space and Aircraft Flight Hardware along with the ability to generate and deliver the finite element models (FEM) in NASTRAN bulk data deck format (MSC NASTRAN or Simcenter NASTRAN).

1.2 At the time of proposal response, the offeror shall have the ability to perform static and dynamic vibration test planning and pre-test analysis.

2.0 OPTION EVALUATION

2.1 The Standard Subcontract does not contain an Option Article.

VOLUME I: TECHNICAL/MANAGEMENT PROPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS

INSTRUCTIONS

JPL will evaluate Volume I of your proposal based on the requested information in the table below and subsequent “Technical/Management Criteria and Factors,” with respect to how your proposal meets the requirements of the Standard Subcontract. This evaluation may include any number of considerations as is appropriate for each area of evaluation:

• Suitability of the various areas of the technical/management approach;

• Level of understanding of the requirements;

• Extent of insight into the technical/management challenges and their solution;

• Effectiveness of management structure; and,

• Relevancy of corporate and/or personnel experience.

VOLUME I - TECHNICAL/MANAGEMENT EVALUATION CRITERIA AND ORGANIZATION

Criteria

Weighting Maximum Page Limit* *Inclusive of RWO responses, requested resumes, sample reports, reviews, papers, or memos

TECHNICAL/MANAGEMENT CRITERIA

· Criterion 1: Technical Capabilities

· Factor 1: Capability to perform classical structural analysis

· Factor 2: Capability to create, analyze, and process finite element models

· Factor 3: Demonstrate proficient usage of designated tools

· Factor 4: Ability to modify existing software to perform specific tasks

· Criterion 2: Related Experience

· Factor 1: Analysis Approach

· Factor 2: Related Knowledge and Experience

· Factor 3: Related Test Experience

· Factor 4: Documentation

· Criterion 3: Resources & Information Protection

· Factor 1: Tools and facilities available to perform work

· Factor 2: Personnel available to perform work

· Factor 3: Safeguarding JPL Information

· Criterion 4: Contract Management Approach

· Factor 1: Work Management to Ensure Success

· Factor 2: RWO Responses

· Factor 3: Rapid Response to SWO RFPs

· Factor 4: Availability to travel on short notice

*If “Page Limit” is checked: Any required page limitations included in an RFP shall be strictly enforced. A page size is defined as 8 ½” x 11” each; any drawings/photos are included; single spacing minimum; font size not less than 10; all margins ½” or greater. If there is a “Required” page limit, no pages beyond the number specified will be evaluated. Unless requested, mockups, models, samples, hardware, or software of any kind must not be furnished and will not be considered. JPL forms/attachments, such as A-1, will not to be included in the Maximum Page Limit.

TECHNICAL/MANAGEMENT CRITERIA AND FACTORS

Factors are not assigned weightings. All factors for a given criteria are accounted for when scoring that criteria:

Organize your proposal contents by addressing each criteria, factor, and sub-factor as instructed below, in the specified order. If requested, ensure any sample reports, reviews, papers, or memos reference the corresponding criterion, factor(s), or sub-factor(s).

1.0 Criterion 1: T1 Technical Capabilities. The proposer must describe its ability to:

1.1 Factor 1: Perform structural analysis using classical methodologies.

1.2 Factor 2: Use finite element analysis to create NASTRAN models and perform appropriate model checks, analysis and processing of model results. Also transfer finite element models (FEMs) to and from JPL in NASTRAN bulk data deck format. If the offeror uses analysis software other than NASTRAN, the offeror shall deliver the FEM in NASTRAN format with NASTRAN results and ensure the NASTRAN results are within 2% of the offeror’s analysis software results prior to the delivery.

1.3 Factor 3: Use each of the following structural analysis design software tools:

1.3.1 ADAMS

1.3.2 ABAQUS / MSC Marc

1.3.3 FEMAP

1.3.4 LS-DYNA

1.3.5 MATLAB

1.3.6 NASGRO

1.3.7 SigFit

1.3.8 Optistruct

1.3.9 Hypermesh

1.3.10 MathCAD and/or Maple

1.3.11 Helius Composite and/or ESAComp

1.3.12 VA One

1.3.13 Siemens NX (for Pre- and Post-Nastran Processing)

1.4 Factor 4: Modify analysis software and/or develop software interfaces to adapt to specific problems and automate analysis processes. In particular, the ability to write and include user defined model components that are beyond the standard as purchased software. Provide examples of these types of software modifications or interfaces and their application to past projects.

2.0 Criterion 2: T2 Related Experience. Describe your company’s related experience with efforts similar to that of the Standard Subcontract, as follows:

2.1 Factor 1: Provide your analysis approach for all phases of an instrument or spacecraft subsystem or assembly for structures to be analyzed, which may be comprised of or containing metallic materials, composite materials, bolted joints, adhesive/bonds, optics, and mechanisms. Include the technical approach and analysis flow. Provide a discussion of this approach and at least two (2) examples from past analyses. Experience in the analysis of specifically space flight hardware is significant.

2.2 Factor 2: Related knowledge and analysis experience with the following (provide examples if applicable):

2.2.1 Limit loads definition for assembly components and interfaces

2.2.2 Finite Element modeling development and check-out procedures

2.2.3 Detailed stress analysis of components (including contact, bonded, and bolted joint analysis)

2.2.4 Dynamics Analysis (including sine and random vibration, force limiting, jitter dynamics)

2.2.5 Development of reduced models through usage of NASTRAN Superelement and DMIG

2.2.6 Fatigue and Fracture analysis

2.2.7 Fracture control classification determination, documentation, and the associated analyses (fail safe, containment, safe life, etc.)

2.2.8 Thermal stress and distortion analysis (including thermal temperature mapping)

2.2.9 Structural stability (buckling) analysis (linear and non-linear)

2.2.10 Nonlinear (material, large deformation, contact) structural analysis

2.2.11 Model reduction techniques (converting fine mesh model to a coarse mesh one)

2.2.12 Topology optimization

2.2.13 Comprehensive knowledge of NASA standards, requirements, and analysis methodologies

2.2.14 Multi-body dynamic analysis including mechanisms

2.2.15 Impact analysis utilizing explicit dynamic approach

2.3 Factor 3: Related test preparation experience:

2.3.1 Ability to perform pre-test analysis including, but not limited to, analysis of the test configuration, determining test predictions, instrumentation location, and hardware capabilities for static, dynamic and modal testing.

2.3.2 Ability to perform post-test model correlation (when necessary) from static, dynamic and modal testing.

2.4 Factor 4: Provide your approach for (and attach a sample of) mechanical analysis documentation. This is critical to the capture and transfer of appropriate design information, and the high quality of said documentation is necessary to avoid misinterpretation or errors as designs mature and evolve. The quality of the documentation that is to be typically expected as the analysis deliverable will be evaluated along the following criteria:

2.4.1 Completeness / Thoroughness

2.4.2 Understandability

2.4.3 Rigorousness

2.4.4 Accuracy and approach

3.0 Criterion 3: M1 Resources & Information Protection

3.1 Factor 1: Describe how you determined that you possess the tools and facilities necessary to successfully perform the work described in the Standard Subcontract.

3.1.1 Describe your approach for being able to provide frequent and cost-effective interaction with JPL (including, but not limited to, a physical presence) to perform the work described in the Standard Subcontract

3.2 Factor 2: Describe how you will have personnel available with the skills to successfully perform the work described in the Standard Subcontract. List and describe the qualifications of proposed key personnel who are likely to perform the work described in the Standard Subcontract, as well as the management of the subcontract. Provide a representative sample of resumes and summaries of related experience of personnel that will be tasked with meeting the requirements set forth in the Standard Subcontract. Personnel should be:

3.2.1 Skilled in using analytical tools compatible with JPL modeling and analysis tools, primarily NASTRAN FEM’s. Skilled using additional analytical tools required to perform various analyses.

3.3 Factor 3: Describe the approach that you will use to safeguard JPL information. Describe how you will safeguard sensitive information while performing the work described in the Standard Subcontract. Describe how you will protect sensitive information from unauthorized use and disclosure. Submit the “JPL_AGP_Cyber_Review_Template_Rev_41.xlsx” as specified in the AGP entitled “Security Requirements for Unclassified Information Technology Resources” for your network and facility. Your Security Plan, as approved by JPL’s Enterprise Tech, will become an Exhibit to the executed subcontract. As used here, “sensitive information” refers to:

3.3.1.1 Information that a contractor has developed and marked as proprietary, confidential, or with a limited or restricted rights notice, or that the Government has generated that qualifies for an exception to the Freedom of Information Act, which is not currently in the public domain, and which may embody trade secrets or commercial or financial information, and which may be sensitive or privileged;

3.3.1.2 Information that is marked JPL/Caltech Proprietary, Proposal Sensitive or Business Discreet;

3.3.1.3 Design information or guidance as may be embodied in or derived from computer-aided engineering, computer-aided design, analysis models, manufacturing models, drawing or translation of any of the foregoing, regardless of whether such information or guidance is marked or unmarked; or

3.3.1.4 Information obtained directly from JPL electronic resources, such as JPL computers, servers, networks, electronic libraries or document repositories, regardless of whether such information is marked or unmarked.

4.0 Criterion 4: M2 Contract Management Approach

4.1 Factor 1: Describe the approach that you will use to manage the work described in the Standard Subcontract to ensure success in the following areas:

4.1.1 Quality of technical work – Describer how you will ensure the Standard Subcontract is completed with the highest technical quality.

4.1.2 Meeting schedule – Describe how you will ensure the agreed upon schedule will be met.

4.1.3 Staying with the agreed upon cost – the risk of overruns falls on the subcontractor. Explain how you will manage and mitigate this risk.

4.2 Factor 2: RFP Attachment A-22, “Representative Work Orders (RWO 1, RWO 2, and RWO 3)” is consistent with the format, description, and requirements that will be submitted to obtain task support under this subcontract. Please review and submit a relevant RWO proposal and price estimate for each RWO that will be evaluated against Volume II hereunder and the following:

4.2.1 Technical Approach (how you will do the work); and

4.2.2 Management Approach (staffing, labor distribution, manage cost and schedule); and

4.2.3 Schedule Approach (what is your schedule to complete the tasks)

4.3 Factor 3: Describe in detail how you will rapidly respond to JPL’s requests for proposal for new or modified Subcontract Work Orders (SWOs), which JPL will issue under the SWO procedure described in the Standard Subcontract.

4.4 Factor 4: Describe in detail your availability to travel to JPL on short notice in support of kickoff meetings, reviews, tiger teams, and testing.

VOLUME II: REPRESENTATIVE WORK ORDER (RWO) INSTRUCTIONS

This portion of RFP requires the submission of technical responses and cost estimates for three (3) separate and distinct Representative Work Orders (RWOs), found as Attachment A-22 to this RFP. Reference the Volume III Cost Instructions for the requirements on submitting the RWO cost estimates.

REPRESENTATIVE WORK ORDER (RWO) INSTRUCTIONS

1.0 Electronic Submission and File Formats

Volume II responses must be emailed to the JPL Subcontracts Manager. Hardcopy submittals will not be accepted.

1.1 Proposals are to be submitted only as an attachment to an e-mail, and must:

· Have a scanned signature or an e-signature

· Be limited to one or more of the following file formats:

· “.pdf” (preferred)

· “.doc” or “.docx” for Word files

· “.ppt” or “.pptx” for PowerPoint files

· Not be an “.exe” or encrypted file or have multiple file extensions (e.g. .doc.pdf) JPL IT Security system may reject multiple file extensions for suspected malicious content.

· Email attachments are limited to 20MB. If your email submission is greater than this, please break into multiple emails.

1.2 JPL reserves the right to retain all proposal information submitted in response to this RFP.

2.0 All RWOs have been written to include multiple technical disciplines. (Note: actual Subcontract Work Orders (SWOs) issued during the term of the subcontract may or may not be as inclusive as these RWOs.)

2.1 These RWOs are purely representative and will not be an actual task performed under the contract. You are not required to perform any work as part of this exercise and you should not submit any deliverables shown on the RWO forms.

3.0 The RWO exercise simulates the proposal response process in which the technical and management approaches and cost proposal are specified.

3.1 Your response should be specific and complete enough to clearly and fully demonstrate that you:

3.1.1 Understand the high-level requirements and the technical scope of each RWO; and

3.1.2 Have a process to identify staff, with appropriate skillsets, who can perform the work.

3.2 RWO responses will be due with the proposal.

3.3 Each RWO response will consist of 2 parts: 1) a proposal response describing the technical and management approaches, and 2) a cost estimate.

4.0 Technical Approach

4.1 Identify any assumptions made in preparing RWO response and any areas needing further JPL guidance.

4.2 Explain your understanding of the statement of work and processes for completing the work.

4.3 Identify the staffing skill mix, team size, tools, etc. needed to perform the work. For each staff member, indicate whether that person is in-house, from a lower-tier, or job requisition.

4.4 Identify the deliverables and your delivery process, if applicable.

5.0 Management Approach

5.1 Describe how the work will be managed. This should address how work will be tracked, processes for identifying and mitigating risks, and your quality assurance approach.

5.2 Describe how you will manage cost vs schedule.

5.3 Describe how you will coordinate and manage the work to be performed by lower-tier subs. Describe your sub-tier vetting process and your process for reviewing sub-tier’s costs for reasonableness.

5.4 Identify other resources necessary to accomplish the RWO.

6.0 Schedule Approach

6.1 Provide a resource-loaded schedule for completing the effort, including key milestones.

6.2 Identify skill mix of labor types for meeting technical requirements and schedule.

7.0 The submission of SWOs requires a rapid turn-around time. You are advised that if you have technical questions, you should include those questions as part of the RWO response, per paragraph 4.1 above. JPL will not provide any technical answers. If you have procedural questions regarding the RWO proposal process, you should submit them by e-mail to the cognizant Subcontracts Manager. JPL will respond as quickly as is practicable.

VOLUME III: COST/PRICE INSTRUCTIONS

Cost Reimbursable Subcontract with SWOs

Failure to provide the cost or pricing data requested below may render the proposal nonresponsive

1.0 DATA SUBMITTAL

1.1 Provide a proposal cover sheet, signed by the proposer’s authorized representative, stating the proposed cost, profit or fee, and total price.

1.2 Provide the information requested in Sections 1 and 2 of Attachment A-17, “Proposer, Accounting System and Cost Accounting Standards Coverage & Disclosure Statement Information” and submit with the proposal.

In compliance with RFP Attachment A-20 “Evidence of Adequacy of Accounting System”, if selected for negotiations, at the time of selection the proposer must provide one or more of the following documents:

1) A Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) accounting system certification.

2) A third-party accounting system certification (e.g., another government agency or prime contractor).

3) A letter from the proposer’s accounting firm stating that the firm approves of the adequacy of the proposer’s accounting system for accumulating costs under a cost reimbursement subcontract.

Note: As required per the RFP Cover Letter, at the time of notification of selection, the offeror must show verification that a Contracting Officer or DCAA has determined that the offeror’s accounting system is adequate for determining costs applicable to this contract, in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 16.301-3(a)(1). Proposers are warned that your proposal will be rejected if the agency was unable to obtain audit verification (reference RFP Technical/Management Proposal Instructions 1.0)

1.3 Provide the pricing and business data requested in paragraphs 2.0 and 3.0 below.

1.4 Provide the supplemental business information requested in paragraph 7.0 below.

1.5 If proposer elects to provide a cost sharing proposal, such a proposal may be submitted in addition to, or instead of, the basic proposal. The cost sharing proposal shall provide all required cost information for the complete effort and clearly indicate which part of the effort is to be funded by the proposer and which part is to be funded by JPL.

1.6 For proposals greater than $2.0 million, upon completion of subcontract negotiation, the pricing data requested below must be certified in accordance with Attachment B-10, “Certificate of Current Cost or Pricing Data” unless an exception applies. If any exception per Attachment B-13, “Claims for Exceptions to Cost or Pricing Data” is applicable, the proposer shall provide a written request in accordance with Attachment B-13 to qualify for an exception to the requirement for submission of certified pricing data. If an exception does apply, the pricing data requested in paragraphs 2.0 and 3.0 below is still required for proposal evaluation purposes (including but not limited to assessing technical understanding and determining reasonableness of cost) but does not need to be certified.

1.6.1 In the event that only one proposal is received in response to this RFP, the proposal exceeds $2.0 million, and the proposal is selected, JPL may require the proposer to certify cost or pricing data provided in the proposal in accordance with Attachment B-10, “Certificate of Current Cost or Pricing Data”. Submission of the proposal constitutes agreement to provide a Certificate of Current Cost or Pricing Data, signed by the proposer’s authorized representative, as the sole proposer under these circumstances.

1.6.2 For each individual item included in the proposal for which the price exceeds $2.0 million and is based on catalog or market prices, or prices set by law or regulation, a written request for an exception to the submission of certified cost or pricing data in accordance with Attachment B-13, “Claims for Exceptions to Cost or Pricing Data” is required. If an item qualifies for an exception but is priced at less than or equal to $2.0 million, state the basis of the price and provide appropriate reference documentation. A written request for an exception is not required.

1.7 For proposals greater than $2.0 million provide the Cost Accounting Standards (CAS) Coverage and Disclosure Statement information requested in Section 3 of Attachment A-17, “Proposer, Accounting System and Cost Accounting Standards Coverage & Disclosure Statement Information”.

2.0 PROPOSAL PRICING

Provide the cost/price information requested below in accordance with “Attachment A-15 Mechanical Services-Custom CEB” (Cost Element Breakdown).

2.1 Attachment A-15 shall be provided in an Excel or Excel-compatible format, including the following worksheets as applicable. Proposers may use their own template as long as all the data required in Attachment A-15 is included.

Tab 1 – Labor Rate Ranges & Annual Escalation Provide the proposed labor category detail, corresponding FY’25 direct labor rate ranges, and annual direct labor rate escalation to be applied in determining the FY’26 though FY’29 direct labor rates.

For each labor category proposed in support of the Standard Subcontract provide the following.

Labor category title Code or number (if any) Description of the roles and responsibilities Typical education and experience requirements Security clearance level (note “none” or security clearance level assigned) FY’25 direct labor rate range (minimum to maximum)

Provide the estimated annual direct labor escalation percentages for FY’26 through FY’29 (subcontract years two through five) to be applied to the prior year’s direct labor rate ranges in determining the labor rate ranges for each respective fiscal year.

For information purposes only, Tab 1 includes a sample chart showing the requested information for two sample labor categories, and the corresponding sample annual escalation percentages. The sample rates shown are in no way indicative of proposed rates expected by JPL.

Tab 2 – Indirect Rates Provide the proposed indirect rate detail, application base, and corresponding FY’25 through FY’29 indirect rates.

For each year of the five-year period of performance provide a comprehensive set of all indirect rates applicable to the cost of the work performed in support of the Standard Subcontract. Indicate the application base to which the rate is applied.

For each selected subcontractor, a negotiated indirect rate table covering the complete five-year period of performance, will be included in the Standard Subcontract, Article 2 Payment Provisions.

The negotiated indirect rates will be used for the calculation of fee for each negotiated SWO. Reference paragraph Tab 3 below.

This fee calculation methodology supports FAR 16.306 Cost-plus-fixed-fee contracts, which states in part that a cost-plus-fixed-fee contract is a cost-reimbursement contract that provides for payment to the contractor of a negotiated fee that is fixed at the inception of the contract.

Note that, in accordance with NASA’s “Structured Approach Profit/Fee Objective”, fee is not applied to Facilities Capital Cost of Money (FCCM) expense. As a result, FCCM rates do not need to be included in the Indirect Rate set submittal. For additional information on FCCM, reference Federal Acquisition Regulations 52.215-16 and 52.215-17, For information purposes only, Tab 2 includes a sample chart listing a sample set of indirect rates. The sample rates shown are in no way indicative of proposed rates expected by JPL.

Tab 3 – SWO Fee Calculation Tab 3 is provided for information purposes only. As noted therein, each SWO will include the total negotiated SWO cost as based on current rates in effect at the time, plus a fee amount which results from the application of the negotiated fee percentage to the total SWO cost resulting from the application of the negotiated indirect rates. The negotiated fee percentage will not be applied to the SWO cost resulting from the application of current indirect rates in effect at the time. Note that all allowable, actual cost incurred will be reimbursed in accordance with the terms of the Standard Subcontract.

Provide acknowledgement and acceptance that the fee calculation for all SWOs issued during the complete subcontract period of performance will be based on the application of the negotiated fee amount to the total cost amount (excluding FCCM) that results from the application of the negotiated indirect rates. All current labor rates included in the fee calculation base are assumed to fall within the negotiated labor rate ranges for the applicable labor category.

Tab 4 – RWO Cost Breakdown Provide the proposed cost element breakdown detailing the proposed price for each of the three hypothetical RWOs (reference RFP Volume I Technical/Management Proposal Instructions 4.2 and Volume II Representative Work Order Instructions)

The cost element data shall be provided in accordance with paragraph 3.0 below. The proposed rates used within Tab 4 shall be consistent with the FY'25 labor rate ranges proposed within Tabs 1 and the FY’25 indirect rates proposed within Tab 2.

2.2 As applicable, within Attachment A-15 show all formulas used within a worksheet cell. For the application of indirect rates and factors, the rate or factor, the corresponding base cost, and the resulting total shall each be identifiable.

2.3 JPL reserves the right to evaluate the reasonableness of the proposed cost/price. JPL may request and examine, at any time before award, all records or documents directly pertinent to the information requested or submitted. Submission of the proposal constitutes agreement to provide the pertinent data as stated herein.

3.0 COST ELEMENTS SUPPORTING DATA

All basis-of-estimate information requested below, shall be submitted in PDF, Microsoft Word, or a compatible format, with fully searchable text (i.e. no text images).

3.1 Direct Labor – Reference Attachment A-15 Tab 4

Failure to provide the direct labor rate data requested below may render the proposal nonresponsive.

3.1.1 Labor shall be proposed by work-hour (not work-month). If selected for subcontract award, a Full Time Equivalent (FTE) labor profile by month may be required.

3.1.2 Explain the basis of the labor-hour estimates by labor classification. Show all calculations in detail, including the development of any factored hours and the base to which the factor is applied.

3.1.3 Explain the development of the labor rates, including all escalation factors. State whether the proposed direct labor rates are averages, or are the specific rates of the workforce proposed.

3.1.4 If available, provide evidence of Government approval of direct labor rates for each labor classification.

3.2 Travel – Reference Attachment A-15 Tab 4-1

3.2.1 Travel

3.2.1.1 State the date, origin, destination, and purpose of each trip proposed.

3.2.1.2 Provide the per trip travel cost breakdown including, but not limited to, the following as applicable; number of travelers, number of nights, number of rental cars, airfare, mileage, lodging, meals & incidental expenses, and rental car expense.

3.2.1.3 Provide current company policy regarding the reimbursement of travel expenses and the accounting of such costs as a direct or indirect expense.

3.3 Material - Reference Attachment A-15 Tab 4-2

3.3.1 Provide a detailed Bill of Material listing all raw materials and purchased parts, including: part number, description, quantity, unit price, extended price, lead time, supplier, and basis-of-estimate. Include, and separately identify, all applied mark-up amounts unique to material cost.

3.3.2 "Raw Mat'l Mark-up" shall include only those mark-up amounts unique to raw material cost, e.g. material handling, freight-in, scrap, etc.

3.3.3 Basis of Estimate "Source Document" includes (but is not limited to) purchase order (current or historical), catalog price, and engineering estimate.

3.3.4 Basis of Estimate "Reference" shall cite the specific Source Document, i.e. Purchase Order number and date, catalog publication and date, engineering estimate back-up, etc.

3.4 Subcontract Detail – Reference Attachment A-15 Tab 4-3

3.4.1 Provide the subcontractor’s name, location, description of subcontract, subcontract type (i.e. Cost Reimbursable, Fixed Price, etc.), basis of estimate, and proposed amount by year.

3.4.2 Provide the basis-of-estimate for each subcontract, including the process utilized to determine the reasonableness of each subcontractor’s proposed price. Explain any adjustment made to the subcontractor’s proposed price.

3.5.1 Computer Usage

Describe the proposed computer usage, extent of usage, rate, and the total cost. Explain the development of each rate.

3.5.2 Consultants

Indicate the specific task requiring consultant services. Identify each proposed consultant, state the proposed hourly/daily rate, the estimated number of hours/days, and any associated costs (e.g. travel expense). State whether the consultant has been compensated at the quoted rate for similar services performed in connection with Government contracts.

3.5.3 Licensing and Royalty Information

Provide a description, supporting cost data, and corresponding cost, for each licensing and royalty expense item proposed.

3.5.4 Other

Provide a description, supporting cost data, and corresponding cost, for each additional other direct cost item proposed.

3.6 Indirect Cost - Attachment A-15 Tab 1

Failure to provide the indirect rate data requested below may render the proposal nonresponsive.

3.6.1 Explain the development of each proposed indirect expense rate (e.g., labor overhead, material overhead, off-site burden, general and administrative).

3.6.2 Specifically identify the cost elements included in the base to which each indirect rate is applied. List the indirect expense rates experienced for the past two years.

3.6.3 Explain any significant variance between the experienced and the proposed indirect rates.

3.6.4 Provide evidence of Government approval of each indirect rate, if available.

3.7 Business Reporting Funding Data - Attachment B-21

3.7.1 If selected for negotiations, for proposals of $500,000 or greater, Attachment B-21 “JPL Business Reporting - Cost & Liability Data” shall be provided in an Excel or Excel-compatible format.

3.7.2 The “Cumulative Total Cost” amount shall include all direct cost, applicable applied burden, and Cost of Money (COM).

3.7.3 The “Unfilled Orders Outstanding/Commitment” (UOO) amount shall include the cumulative month-end estimate for all planned purchase orders issued, plus all planned subcontractor incremental funding, LESS the cumulative estimate for purchase order and subcontractor expenses paid through the end of the month, plus all applicable burden, COM and fee.

3.7.4 The “Termination Liability” shall include all cost and fee, in excess of the cumulative Total Price plus the UOO, estimated to be incurred in the event the Subcontract is terminated as of the month indicated. Provide a written Basis of Estimate for the Termination Liability expense in accordance with paragraph 3.0 above.

3.7.5 Within final month of the Period of Performance, the Total Funding amount shall not exceed Total Price amount.

4.0 PROGRESS PAYMENTS

Not applicable to this Cost Reimbursable subcontract.

5.0 PROVISIONAL MILESTONE/PARTIAL PAYMENTS

Not applicable to this Cost Reimbursable subcontract.

6.0 RESERVED

7.0 SUPPLEMENTAL BUSINESS/COST INFORMATION

Provide the following supplemental business information with the proposal:

7.1 Financial Statement/Financial Responsibility

Demonstrate that the proposer has sufficient financial resources to handle a subcontract of the dollar value anticipated.

7.1.1 Provide a copy of the proposer’s annual financial statements for the last three years, and any information regarding additional financial resources required to perform the proposed effort (e.g. bank account statements, or a letter of credit from the proposer’s bank which includes the amount of credit initially granted and the current available balance).

7.1.2 Identify any third parties who may have security liens on the proposer’s intellectual property, personal property, or general intangibles.